💾 Archived View for dioskouroi.xyz › thread › 29444393 captured on 2021-12-05 at 23:47:19. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
________________________________________________________________________________
The Magma name appears to require disambiguation:
His Magma programming language (
https://github.com/blainehansen/magma
):
_The goal of this project is to: create a programming language and surrounding education/tooling ecosystem capable of making formal verification and provably correct software mainstream and normal among working software engineers._
Magma computer algebra system (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magma_(computer_algebra_system...
):
_Magma is a computer algebra system designed to solve problems in algebra, number theory, geometry and combinatorics. It is named after the algebraic structure magma. It runs on Unix-like operating systems, as well as Windows._
I was just about to post the same thing. I don't like picking on things like names, but the "old magma" is still very popular in mathematics.
I heard from a friend (have not verified myself) that the paper in which the Magma computer algebra system was introduced is the most-cited paper in the whole of pure mathematics.
There is a discussion about how to define this and a comment concluding that indeed by one metric the Magma paper is most cited here:
https://mathoverflow.net/questions/199978/the-most-cited-pap...
John Cannon, who started Magma, pushed very hard for people to cite that paper whenever they used Magma in a paper. We eventually did something similar with SageMath for a bit, but it felt weird having everybody cite a paper with me personally as the main author, when there are nearly 1000 contributors to Sage, so we made up a reference with the author “The Sage Developers”, or something like that. As a result there is probably no MathSciNet entry tracking citations to Sagemath even though many papers cite Sagemath.
My first thought was the Magma object database
https://github.com/magma-database/magma
And here I was hoping someone was deep diving the prog rock
rabbit-hole:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magma_(band)
Does this offer any advantages to Ada/Spark? Having worked in formal method environments there's a lot to be said of a tool that's been around for a while. Even with formal methods you can still have bugs and there's a risk in using new tools. Without getting those millions of hours of development time it's hard to know a tool really works regardless of the theory behind it.
Yeah, he talks as if this hasn't been tried before. See agda or Idris.
I like this idea. I hope to use the language someday and translate (upgrade) my Rust code to it.